There May Be No Coping with Copenhagen
What follows are some key areas of the document containing what I believe are its most odious provisions. It is of course no substitute for a full reading.
On page 6 in preambular paragraphs (PP) 13-15, signatories are expected to acknowledge the following non-bracketed items:
(PP. 13) “Current and potential climate change impacts require a shift in the global investment patterns and that criteria for financing allocation shall clearly respond to the priorities identified by the international community, with climate change stabilization being one of these priorities.”
(PP. 14) “Current atmospheric concentrations are principally the result of historical emissions of greenhouse gases, the most significant share of which has originated in developed countries.”
(PP. 15) “Developed countries have a historical responsibility for their disproportionate contribution to the causes and consequences of climate change, reflecting their disproportionate historical use of a shared global carbon space since 1850 as well as their proposed continuing disproportionate use of the remaining global carbon space.”
Allow me to translate: Free market capitalism hasn’t worked to our satisfaction, so it must be stopped. It has brought the earth to the eve of destruction. Oh, and it’s the developed world’s fault, especially America’s. The date chosen in PP. 15 appears to betray a belief that the entire Industrial Age has been one big mistake.
Now let’s go to where the money is.
Paragraph 33 on page 39 of the negotiating text itself reads, “By 2020 the scale of financial flows to support adaptation in developing countries must be [at least USD 67 billion] [in the range of USD 70–140 billion] per year.” The bracketed amounts are the only alternatives. These duties would arrive after a proposed initial start of $50-86 billion.
Paragraph 41 on page 43 contemplates all manner of potential wealth transfers from the developed world to everyone else, including but not at all limited to the following: possible assessments of up to 0.7% of a country’s gross domestic product (GDP), auctioning of emission allowances, levies on CO2 emissions, taxes on “carbon-intensive products and services,” levies on international transactions, and fines for noncompliance.
At the very bottom of page 145, there is mention of assessing “financial penalties, at a minimum of ten times the market price of carbon, for any emissions in excess of the level implied by the emissions reduction commitment.” America, meet your carbon straitjacket.
Finally, let’s get to how the UNFCCC becomes a governmental entity. Though it appears that it might be supplanted at crunch time by much more vague language, paragraph 38 on page 18 describes what the framers have in mind:
The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:
(a) “The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.”
(b) “The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows …” FYI: they are adaptation, compensation, technology, mitigation, and REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.)
(c) “The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include … an international registry for the monitoring, reporting, and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries.”
From all appearances, agreeing to the COP would mean signing away a significant portion of our national sovereignty in the name of solving a problem that even former climate change cheerleaders are starting to doubt, which may just have been totally scientifically debunked, and whose origins are based on raw data that is apparently no longer available — all for the sole purpose of transferring vast amounts of wealth that will be spent on projects accomplishing very little of economic value, thus threatening to impoverish the entire world.
If there’s an alternative way to interpret what I have described here and the totality of the COP itself, I want to know what it is.
Our president, possibly softened up by his achievement-free attainment of the Nobel Peace Prize, has signaled that he’s ready to sign if everyone else is:
U.S. officials said Washington is behind the deal and pledged that President Obama will attend the talks himself if enough progress is made.
I believe it’s fair to characterize a U.S. president who signs the COP treaty as seriously betraying his country’s best interests, regardless of how it might be watered down in negotiations, because its underlying premises are all either very dubious or false. Even though the Senate must ratify any treaty a president signs under what’s left of our Constitution, some might still describe Obama’s choice by employing a word that starts with “T” and rhymes with “reason.”
(c) “The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include … an international registry for the monitoring, reporting, and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries.”
An international effort requires international monitoring, etc.
The transfer of technical resources from developed countries to developing countries should be financed by the recipient country, unless rich countries (oil producing) have spare change.
Developing countries should finance their efforts. Shift their military budgets to ecology. Lots of their pollution comes from dirty, fixable auto emissions and deforestation.
I may be mistaken but only Congress can ratify a treaty, not the President. This one may never make it through.
“” … the Senate must ratify any treaty (even a pretender) “president” signs under what’s left of our Constitution. “”
That notwithstanding, If 0zero signs up at Copenhagen, the only word that adequately describes that and/or any other of his actions) absolutely starts with “T” and (ends) with “reason.”
Are you listening out there in Australia, “Peking” KRudd?? (Sycophantic sino-slobbering successor to those other well known and as-treasonous appeasers, surrenderers of Australia’s sovereignty, all, Whitlam, Hawke and Keating!)
God help us. I must plead stupidity because until I saw the video of Lord Monckton the other day, I never even heard of this…and I always considered myself a voracious reader. It’s embarrassing to say this.
I passed the Monckton video to a buddy with whom I’m always having good natured discussions/emails on contemporary issues and his response was I should have been listening to NPR instead of right-wing talk radio.
Be that as it may, this treaty is a travesty. I downloaded a draft from another site and began to read it last night. Anyone who believes in America as its been known to the world should fight this treaty with all our might. We truly will be giving up our sovereignty and unfortunately, the American Exceptionalism denier-in-chief will be only more than happy to do so.
*sigh*
Any such treaty would be subject to the final review and approval of the Senate. You do remember the Kyoto treaty, yes?
Not even this gang of tools is stupid enough to ratify anything that could come out of Copenhagen signed by the current transient in residence at the White House.
Last I checked, Senate ratification is required on treaties.
As John Derbyshire says, ” We are doomed”.
What do you mean ‘…could irretrievably compromise American sovereignty.’?
That’s the ultimate goal of the entire endeavor – not some unintended consequence.
Doesn’t matter what Obama signs. It’s not binding until the Senate ratifies it. And the Senate just handed the One one heaping helping serving of humble pie on healthcare.
History lesson. The United States signed the Kyoto Accords. But Clinton never sent them to the Senate because the Senate voted I believe 100% for a resolution condemning them. Hence the United States never ratified them.
I think it might be safe to say that sending this pile of UN crapola to the Senate in the middle of a growing recession with the Blue Dogs all fired up will pretty much assure it’s DOA.
The Manchurian President will sign this treaty. If he could sideline Fox News he’d do so with very little awareness of the devastating effect it will have on America’s sovereignty and standard of living.
The MSM has given him carte blanche to do as he pleases. The usual rules don’t apply to him. He might well have been born in Hawaii but it was a serious mistake not to demand that he produce his birth certificate and hospital records. They would have been demanded of anyone else.
With the 2010 elections on the horizon, Congress will not ratify the treaty; like everything else Obama does, it will be all pomp & circumstance with a little hot air.
It seems as if my sole purpose in life is to shout this from the highest rooftops:
“Climate change is a hoax!”
Mankind does not possess the ability to change the weather. Mankind cannot “save the planet” because the systems that influence weather are much more powerful than we are.
“Global warming” or “climate change” (or whatever phrase is used) does not exist. Variations in weather always occur and what we’re seeing is nothing more. Anyone who believes in it has been well and truly brainwashed. Any politician who believes in it should be removed from office immediately.
Oh, The One will sign it all right.
But he needs 67 votes in the Senate for it to pass.
However, given the current mental difficulties of Senators McCain, Graham, Snowe, Collins, Voinovich, Murkowski, Lugar, Bennett and Cochran this threshold might easily be achieved.
The scary part is that we have a one party senate right now with even a couple republicans believing al-gore.
will this override the constitution if signed?
perhaps the senate will not ratify, but…if they did…
there are so many things wrong with all of the things obama is doing.
the msm needs to be ostracized from daily life in any way possible.
they believe that we, as conservatives, independents etc, are irrelevant, so does obama.
obama is acting like a petulant child with fox network. chavez must be advising, because putin would laugh at him and his stupidity.
Even if the Senate somehow decides to ratify this treaty (2/3 vote required), we’ll simply withdraw from it when the next President takes office. This one-world-government and which army are going to enforce the treaty?
#10 Booker “If he could sideline Fox News he’d do so with very little awareness of the devastating effect it will have on America’s sovereignty and standard of living.”
===========================================================
I disagree. Obama is not stupid. He knows, and is trying.
If Obama knows what’s good for him, he will never set foot in Copenhagen as long as he is President. He should tell them he had to wash his hair, the dog ate his plane tickets, anything!
Whenever one of these radical policy changes comes forward it is time to use the smoke and mirrors detectors.
Here the smoke is ‘a cleaner ecology’ and the mirror is the strawman of ‘you are not green enough.’
The slight-of-hand set up result it to raise taxes and build a one world government. The real players have already set up the machinations for offset-carbon credits to be traded as an international commodity. The corporate nations buy and sell this carbon and include the costs of their transactions back into their products. Presto-chango there becomes a new stealth tax.
No one needs to toxify with pollution but to make it an industy instead of a clean up and to raise the issue as ‘climate change’ is fraud on the grand scale. The illusion is the ‘big lie’ that every stage magician and politician employs. I guess that people like to be fooled.
Obama is a communist.
He has broken his pledge to uphold and defend our Constitution. He has publically stated that he doesn’t even believe in it and deems that its fundamentally flawed.
Our miltary should uphold their pledge to defend the Constitution against ALL enemies both DOMESTIC and foreign. Obama should be arrested. We the people do not have the power to enforce the law. We need our military to defend us.
Anything he signs should be disregarded. He is the biggest threat and enemy that this great nation has ever faced. He must be defeated.
Tom Blumer,
The market is not ‘free’. There are regulations aplenty to govern production — what can be produced, and how. Not addressing coming resource and environmental depletion means losing most our wealth and freedom, in the relative blink of an eyelid. Without human law, there’s the law of nature, and men act like beasts.
Your logic circuits need resetting. Every action has costs. Pointing out costs does not equate to calling the action ‘mistaken’.
The problem must be dealt with regardless of who pays, regardless of who’s fault it may be. Asking large emitters to contibute more can be viewed as post-facto internalization of costs.
Climate change is a global problem. Your destiny is already being determined by the actions (emissions) of others. Solving a global tragedy of the commons will require gobal governance. If that goes against certain ideology, that is unfortunate.
There is the danger that a future Supreme Court with one or more new Obama appointees will support the international bureaucracy over our Constitution, in which case a future administration will have difficulty abrogating unconstitutional agreements. Like the internationals, the Supreme Court also lacks an army, but makes its decisions stick, anyhow.
trea⋅son /ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [tree-zuhn]
–noun 1. the offense of acting to overthrow one’s government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or to one’s state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
——————————————————————————–
Origin:
1175–1225; ME tre(i)so(u)n < AF; OF traïson < L trāditiōn- (s. of trāditiō) a handing over, betrayal. See tradition
By signing this, he would be committing treason upon our country, by congress ratifying this, they too would be culpable of the same.
Commie scum.
obama is acting like a petulant child with fox network. chavez must be advising, because putin would laugh at him and his stupidity.
He’s not stupid. He knows exactly what he is doing.
@17 Paul- Indiana
I meant very little awareness on the part of the public and MSM. I stopped thinking Obama was naive or stupid several months ago.
The pattern is clear: tripling the deficit in his first year, a stimulus bill more devoted to re-electing Democrats than simulating the economy, the appointment of extremists in key positions (as Czars and advisers), disrespect for the rule of law (intimidating Chrysler bond holders in order to benefit his union supporters, his illegal collection of campaign contributions, illegally firing Gerald Walpin, condoning voter intimidation by black thugs), showing undeserved deference for Islam and its leaders and for anti-democracy dictators, apologizing to countries who have been beneficiaries of American Power and Largesse and who, in return have never done anything for America, not supporting the people of Iran in their struggle for a democracy, abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban and al Qaeda, abandoning eastern Europe to the Russians, supporting the anti-democracy thug in Honduras, the takeover of health care, the unwarranted intrusion into every aspect of the economy, the maligning and attempted intimidation of his critics and the participation in the Global Warming (Wealth-Transfer) Hoax.
He makes Nixon look like a choir boy, but that’s ok, he’s elegant.
By signing this treaty, our citizenship would be converted in to a personal liability.
Not even this Congress would be so stupid as to do that. I think. I may be wrong.
If I am wrong, then, to quote a line from one of my favorite movies
“A riot is an ugly thing, and it is high time we had one”.
Obama is NOT a communist, he is corrupt.
Chicago has everything to gain from Obama signing this treaty. Obama’s buddies created the Carbon Exchange in Chicago. So who is going to make a killing in the market here? Once they get on the gravy train, how long do you think it will take for Obama to begin receiving some of the proceeds? One look at Rahm Emanuel making the big bucks after Freddie Mac should enlighten everyone.
Undisclosed relationships and interests. Both President Obama and former Vice-president Al Gore have ‘unclean hands’ here. Both were instrumental in helping to set up the Chicago Climate Exchange. Obama, for 3 years (1998-2001), was on the Board of the Joyce Foundation which helped fund it. Their cronies, Dr. Richard L. Sandor and his business associates, will literally become centi-millionaires, if not billionaires, overnight if Cap and Trade passes. Sandor was a major Obama supporter.
http://www.russellmeansfreedom.com/2009/crap-betrayed-sam-kephart-exposes-obama-gores-ties-to-carbon-credit-derivitives/
What Obama is doing is strictly about cronyism and no different than what he weaseled out of when Blago tried to sell the senate seat to Ms Jarrett, Obama’s pick. The only reason why Ms Jarrett didn’t get the senate seat is because the FBI caught Blago in the act and then Obama LIED to cover his corrupt activities. You really think that all those years Obama was campaigning for Blago, rising in the Chicago political scene himself, DIDN’T know Blago was corrupt and DIDN’T benefit from Blago’s corruption??? Oh Please, and I suppose you also believe in the tooth fairy? OBAMA IS DIRTY as Charlie Rangel, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the self serving corrupt politicians running the country into the ground.
“Its the economy, stupid.” No offense
The President can champion X, and Congress
can pass the legislation, but they cannot
pay for X, so it will never happen;
The goal here is to trade promises for
support from the Loony Liberal Left.
Nichevo: Russian for “It does not matter”,
with mixed undertones of despair and
contempt. Peace..Hope..Change the channel.
Draw the curtain; The Farce will soon be over.
If we ratify Copenhagen whats to prevent the US from becoming a signatory to the Treaty of Lisbon or some future iteration thereof?
NO COPING? WHAT? IS THE MIGHTY EURO ARMY GOING TO INVADE US? AND ALSO CHINA AND INDIA? I AM SOOOO SCARED.BESIDE’S “EUROPE”,WON’T ;LAST THAT LONG, AND THE EURABIANS WILL BE HAPPY TO RENEGOTIATE THE TREATY, SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE BUYING SAUDI OIL.
“Last I checked, Senate ratification is required on treaties.”
Check again, Old Soldier. The UN Charter removes that requirement. According to the USSC, treaties have precedence over the Constitution.
I posted a link here to the ruling, but it was deleted. Google it.
When the Senate ratified a treaty that cancels their powers, they lose those powers.
On the Supremecy of Treaties vs the Constitution
Reid v. Covert (1957): “[N]o agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the [federal government] which is free from the restraints of the Constitution”
Of course what is actually practiced may be different than what is supposed to be allowable.
Also see -
Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that,
“The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent”
I always wondered how the “One World Government” that will preceed the final days could possibly be implemented.
Now I know.
The internationalist subversives’ plan is going really well.
This morning the Communist in Chief is pushing for Cap and Trade, the nationalization of the health-care system is matter of weeks, the dollar is in free fall.
It would be nice to have ONE leader, one honest politician able to go on TV and call the American People to resist this communist subversion of the Republic, but I guess we will have to watch this show until the whole socialist catastrophe will fall onto us and will take away any rest of our Freedom.
The new REDcoats are coming…
Thank you for the opportunity to comment
Only the Senate can ratify a treaty. Clinton signed the Kyoto Protocol, but the U.S. isn’t bound by it because it had been voted down in the Senate 95-0 against the treaty.
“Obama is NOT a communist, he is corrupt”.
You are only half right. Of course he is corrupt anybody can see that.
But Obama is a communist to the core. Not a liberal, not a socialist but a COMMUNIST!
He has sought out communists ever since he left his childhood mentor Franklin Davis, a communist. His entire administration is infested with communists, black supremacists and radicals of every stripe.
He is at war with United States and our Constitution. Only our military can stop him by arresting him. They have taken an oath to defend us from all enemies of our Constitution both domestic and foreign. I’m not holding my breath.
Send him to Gitmo with his Muslim jihadists buddies.
27. dscott:
Obama is NOT a communist, he is corrupt.
In practice, communists are corrupt.
#35 Steve
true, but at the same time he is only a tool and a puppet of a much larger conspiracy that goes from Saudi Arabia (that forbids entrance to JEWS BUT ALLOWS SOROS to BE in Saudi Arabia for a convention), to secret societies that have been conquered to the subversives’ cause, to the communist international network, etc. etc.
To defeat this conspiracy we need the might of FREE thinking, free debate, free information .
It’s OUR LONG MARCH.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
ADDENDUM TO MY LAST COMMENT
And to have an idea of the depth of this hole, we need to think about the fact that an islamist like Grover Norquist is in the board of directors of the NRA…
The subversives have worked long and hard, like true capitalists !!!
Call it the Hopehagen trip.
5. Even if the Democrats were that dumb, the Republicans can still stop them. Treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 supermajority, so they need 67 votes, not just 50 or 60.
So as a supposedly “wealthy” country, how much are we going to have to borrow from China so we can turn around and give money to … China?
Honestly, I’m sick of the US being called the world’s wealthiest nation when we are the world’s most deadbeat debtor. Our national debt is bigger than most of the rest of the world’s economies combined. It’s absurd that we would force US taxpayers to shoulder even more debt to send to countries to whom we already owe billions and billions of dollars.
Climate change is the ultimate Marxist scheme. Call your senators every day until they reject this treaty and pray for a heavy snow in Copenhagen.
It is naive to think that Obama feels himself bound by the U.S. Constitution. Jake Tapper (who sometimes gets it) of ABC News gave a report last July 5 regarding the renegotiation of a strategic arms limitation treaty that will run out on December 5. The White House said then that getting the Senate to ratify it would be very difficult, but that extension of the treaty was very important, so that it might be necessary for Obama to implement some aspects of the treaty by executive action, “temporarily bypassing the Senate’s constitutional role,” until such time as the Senate got around to ratifying it.
Maybe we could “temporarily impeach” Obama for that?
The Times of London is reporting that, according to the White House, Obama has no plans to attend the Copenhagen summit — he’s going to Oslo for his Flying Fickle Finger of Fate medallion, and that’s about it.
I’m not convinced. Once he gets to Oslo he might publicly shrug his shoulders and say “Oh, what the hell, it’s just across the channel anyway…” — a move calculated to impress the soft-lefty Euros with its selfless magnanimity.
puked here
It is naive to think that Obama feels himself bound by the U.S. Constitution.’
Truer words have never been spoken!! Our idiot president, bho, who is dangerously intelligent (but a total idiot for failing to appreciate and to realize what a gift he had been given in the US presidency and in American confidence) has only intended to debunk our Constitution, to dismantle our sovereignty and ultimately to humiliate us as a nation. That is correct; bho is blatantly moving lightening speed to make the dead Soviet Premier Kruschev’s dream of burying America a reality. God forbid he should succeed, but he clearly has lots of help, even from American “America – bashers”!!!
44. Cap’n Rusty:
Good lord, thanks for calling attention to that. So much garbage being flung out of the White House I’d missed that piece.
Fear not, any treaty signed will be such a watered down compromise it will not change a thing. Russia, China and India will see to that.
Obama might want to commit America to the lifestyle of African tribespeople in the pre-colonial period by Hillary will kick him and say look Barry, nobody else is doing this crap. Forget about wanting everybody to think you’re a cool dude for once.
What Justice was it that said that the Constitution wasn’t a suicide pact? I will not submit. I will not let anyone else submit me nor subject me to their will or desires. Those who do have committed treason against me and against the country and their rank does not matter.
Treason….. That word just keeps popping up now, doesn’t it?
Tolbert.
The Constitution, under the Supremacy Clause, does hold that treaties are the “supreme law of the land.”
Missouri v. Holland (1920)
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/holland.htm
{snipped}
“The treaty in question does not contravene any prohibitory words to be found in the Constitution. The only question is whether it is forbidden by some invisible radiation from the general terms of the Tenth Amendment. We must consider what this country has become in deciding what that amendment has reserved.”
A liberal Justice re-writing the Constitution. But wait, there’s more!
“Valid treaties of course ‘are as binding within the territorial limits of the States as they are elsewhere throughout the dominion of the United States.’ No doubt the great body of private relations usually fall within the control of the State, but a treaty may override its power….”
U.S. v. Pink (1942)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0315_0203_ZX.html
Not sure this one fits, since the treaty was negotiated in part to settle the legal issues in a uniform and national manner.
If you need credentials in place of reading the law;
http://www.tpromo2.com/gko/may02/050802.htm
Mr. Hoar’s close is powerful and worth pasting;
” Internationalists don’t want the U.S. to enjoy the protections adopted by our Founders, which is why they have eroded the Constitution, fought the insurance that would have been provided by the Bricker Amendment, and continue today to seek to tie the U.S. with so many UN bonds.
If you fancy having such United Nations diktats as the “supreme law of the land,” there is a good way to ensure it: You simply need do nothing at all. ”
The Bricker Amendment would be a great issue for Sara to throw on thetable. Talk about forcing the Dems and RINO’s to go hide in the closet. It would resonate strongly with most Ameriacns, who don’t realize that the UN Charter allows the UN to override ANY Citizens constitutional rights.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter16.shtml
“Article 104
The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each of its Members such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. ”
Of course, if the UN ever tries to exercise such power, they will die like flies, but that is a different issue. The Issue is ‘Why does article 104 exist? Did the Senate even read it? Truman was a big fan of uni-nationalism, the world state.
Attempting to enforce a treaty that has not been ratified will quickly be struck down in court. What happens next depends on how reckless the administration is.
Copenhagen is DOA anyway;
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=510152
What I find amusing is that the undeveloped countries think any reductions in carbon thruput is a plot to keep them undeveloped. The developed nations think it’s a plot to allow the undeveloped nation to catch up. ALL of them think the Science is bogus, so they are all correct on all points.
This is all good news. Except to the rabid environmentalists (AKA Swampies) who want us all to live in caves and hunt mastodon’s with pointy sticks. When one points out that mastodons are extinct, they all say; ‘see, global warming’.
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
EN ÍO
URL CORRECTIONS needed.
Tom, you have an extra period (pajamasmedia.com..) which generates an error page in your URLs for:
[1] which should be add further fuel
and for [14] which should be in Copenhagen.
Sure would be nice to have a preview window in order to check my own URLs for errors (oh irony!).
Many thanks for a terrific piece. I’ve been looking for a concise, standalone, article to pass along to the some of the folks who have been dismissing AGW skeptics for years. They’ll have little inclination to spend time following serial examinations of the info dump in real time, but I may be able to badger them into clicking your round-up of links after reading your posting — making URL corrections all the more urgent.
Among friends and family, I’m the only person I know who actually read the original IPCC report that got this dirty snowball rolling. That document itself included enough smoke from the gun in its footnoted disclaimers to give even a statistical/scientific layman like me pause.
In my experience, the good stuff is almost always in the footnotes. It’s just as true when looking at legal briefs and judicial opinions as it has been in the AGW controversy. While the apostles in this case were claiming 90% confidence levels, aggregating the anomalies and provisos produced a margin of error which has always threatened to exceed the variables under examination. That sort of thing may be the very raison d’être of forgettable, piecemeal annotations.
Oops. Posted the above on the wrong page!
Aaron is the greatest!?!
Gracie
Tas Ransel